Is it mainstream or alternative?

A question I get about once a week: "Is your program a kind of alternative medicine?"

Our program for control and reversal of coronary plaque using CT heart scans applies an eclectic panel of tools to achieve its goals. We use high-tech methods like lipoprotein analysis and CT heart scans; nutritional supplements like fish oil, vitamin D, and l-arginine; diet strategies and "functional foods" (using foods as a therapeutic tool); and conventional medication.

I don't consider this approach "alternative" in the sense that it uses unmeasurable or spiritual strategies. But I don't consider it mainstream, either, since current mainstream practice of heart disease prevention is far less rigorous with far less satisfactory results.

I think I can sum up the Track Your Plaque approach by saying that we use tools that work. Our measure of success is whether or not your heart scan score is stopped or reduced--that's hard to fudge. You can call it what you will, but I call it the best program for heart disease prevention I know of, alternative or mainstream.

Want to see someone turn diabetic?

If you want to witness the transformation of someone into a pre-diabetic or diabetic, put them on a low fat diet.

Dr. Dean Ornish's program, detailed in his books, Dr. Dean Ornish's Program for Reversal of Heart Disease and Eat More, Weigh Less , are woefully outdated in 2006. Yet the low fat notion continues to show up in the consciousness of people I talk to about heart disease reversal.

"I'm already on a low fat diet. Do you think my heart scan score has reversed?"

Highly unlikely. What Dr. Ornish (as a non-cardiologist, by the way) failed to recognize is that what he did manage to reverse in a small number of people is something called "endothelial dysfunction", but he did not reverse or shrink coronary plaque.

Given the limitations of technology when the Ornish concept got its start, it appeared as if reversal was obtained. In reality, all his approach accomplished was a relaxation in tone of abnormally constricted arteries, thus giving the appearance of reversal. Increased artery tone, or endothelial dysfunction, is extremely common when atherosclerotic plaque is present.

Any cardiologist will tell you that there are many ways to reverse endothelial dysfunction: exercise, weight loss, cholesterol drugs, drugs for high blood pressure, fish oil, hormonal therapy, vitamin C, l-arginine, etc. There is nothing special about a low fat diet.

In fact, Track Your Plaque followers will recognize that a low fat diet is, in fact, potentially harmful, particularly when low HDL or small LDL is part of your pattern.

Let's bury the outdated ideas of the Ornish low fat diet once and for all. It doesn't work. All it may do is confuse you and set you back from your real coronary plaque reversal program.

Inulin: A fiber for weight loss

Here's an interesting product that seems to be gaining some popularity for weight loss: Inulin.

Not to be confused with "insulin", with which it is completely unrelated, inulin is a naturally-occurring plant fiber. It's found in broccoli, asparagus, celery, etc. Like beta-glucan from oats or pectin, inulin is a so-called soluble fiber, a fiber that assumes a gel-like consistency when exposed to water.

Inulin has the effect of increasing satiety, or the sensation of fullness. This cuts your craving for foods. I've tried it recently and I prefer it over glucomannan, another soluble fiber for satiety.

The people at Stonyfield Farms have been adding inulin to their yogurts from some time. The nutritionist at the company tells me that there's 2-3 grams of inulin per 6 ounce container of their yogurt.

You can also find inulin as a supplement that you can add to foods, available from some health food stores and online supplement companies. I came across a neat product called Fiber Choice that's now being distributed widely throughout the U.S. I tried their Weight Management version. It was a delicous strawberry taste. The label says take two chewable tablets twice a day, but I found that two tablets three times a day somewhat better. It's best taken around 30-60 minutes prior to each meal and it causes you to be fuller with less food. One caution: It'll cause loads of gas, especially in the beginning. For that reason, you might try starting with a smaller dose, or start on the weekends when you have the option of some privacy!

More info on the Fiber Choice product can be found at their website, http://www.fiberchoice.com.

Disclaimer: I have no relationship with the manufacturer of this product. I'm simply passing on some thoughts on my experience with this interesting possibility for weight loss.

Will you recognize the truth when you see it?

Do you ever wonder that, if the truth were given to you, that you'd recognize it as such? Or would you dismiss it as just another bunch of nonsense?

After all, you and I live in the Information Age. It means that we have access to mountains of information like never before in human history. But it also means that the truth is often drowned out by an avalanche of mis-truths, sales pitches and marketing, and just plain nonsense.

This struck me the other day when I was talking to a patient.

64 years old with a high heart scan score placing her at significant risk, she looked confused. I'd just described the multitude of causes of coronary plaque that we'd uncovered. The heart scan alone had been a shocker.

"I don't understand. My doctor told me that I had nothing to worry about. I've known him for years and he knows me really well. He did a stress test. That was fine. I don't get all this other stuff you're telling me--lipoprotein whatever..."

Despite my efforts to help her gain an understanding of our intensive approach, she just became increasingly more frustrated. "I just don't think I can do this."

That's the last I've heard from her. As far as I know, she's returned to the comfort of her family doctor who has reassured her over the years. And perhaps there's some good in that. But I do fear for the day when, unexpectedly, she suffers some catastrophe that we told her was coming sooner or later unless real preventive efforts were started.

You could say that she failed to recognize the truth when it was given to her-- boldly, unadorned, and with far greater scientific certainty than the casual reassurances she was accustomed to. But, unfortunately, that's all that some people want.

Don't neglect the basics in your heart disease reversal program

Carl loved new ideas and novel approaches. You could tell by the sheer number of nutritional supplements he took. His list had grown to 18 different supplements over the past two years.

Carl came to me for coronary plaque regression. Lipoprotein analysis did uncover several previously unsuspected abnormalties, most notably small LDL particles and lipoprotein(a). In addition, Carl's LDL cholesterol ranged between 111 mg-156 mg and he was clearly hypertensive, with systolic blood pressures consistently around 150-160. (Recall that people with Lp(a) are more prone to hypertension.)

Carl was more than willing to have his lipoprotein(a) reduced. We did so with niacin and testosterone and the level dropped to near zero. Likewise, we corrected his small LDL pattern with niacin, fish oil, and a reduction in processed carbohydrates.

But Carl really resisted doing much about his LDL cholesterol and high blood pressure. I got the sense that these "boring" issues simply didn't interest him. After all, LDL cholesterol and blood pressure were the stuff of TV commercials and the popular conversation propagated by drug companies.

Carl's follow-up heart scan, however, finally persuaded him: a 24% increase in one year, likely due to the neglect of the basic issues.

I liken Carl's case to being like the teenager with a new car who polishes the paint to a bright finish, puts new wheels and tires on it, spruces up the interior with various doodads--but then fails to change the oil. Sometimes it's the most basic issues that can diminish your success.

Issues like LDL cholesterol and high blood pressure aren't the most glamorous, but they do count in your coronary plaque control program.

Is your doctor a hospital employee?

There's a disturbing trend that's growing--silently but rapidly.

In Milwaukee, three hospital systems compete for the local health care dollar. To gain more control over revenues and the routing of patients, the hospitals are aggressively hiring physicians to work for them. I've witnessed many of my cardiology colleagues, primary care doctors, and a substantial number of procedural specialists enticed by the offers made by hospital employers.

This phenomenon is not unique to Milwaukee but is being used in many, perhaps most, major cities in the U.S.

This means that physicians are employees of the hospital. That way, employee-physicians are obliged to use only the hospital system that employs them. In the old days, your doctor could use any hospital he/she desired, depending on the quality, location, facilities, etc. Now, many physician-employees are given no choice but to use the hospital that pays their salary.

That by itself is not necessarily bad. But combine salary with incentives for bringing in patients for hospitalization and procedures--that the rub. In other words, physician-employees are incentivized to generate more revenue for the system, just as employees in many other industries.

If you're a salesman for an insurance company, your job is to bring in more business. If you're a worker on an auto production line, you're expected to meet certain quotas. These same principles are now being applied to many physicians.

How does this affect you? Well, if your physician--especially procedure-driven specialists like cardiologists, general surgeons, orthopedists, etc.--is a hospital employee, BEWARE! Do you really need that procedure, or is your doctor suggesting you have a procedure because it will add to his track record?

Prevention? In this model of health care, why bother? It certainly doesn't pay for a hospital to keep you well. Then why should your physician-employee?

Be careful who you're dealing with. If your physician is a hospital-employee, don't bet on getting preventive care. It's more likely you're that just a future source of revenue when it's time for your bypass operation, hip replacement, carotid endarterectomy, etc.

What more powerful argument is there for increased self-empowerment and information for health care consumers?

Take a walking vacation

If you're planning a vacation, why not consider a walking vacation?

The concept is really taking off. All you need is a pair of comfortable shoes and an interesting locale. More and more services are popping up to help you plan fun and interesting destinations and itineraries. One such catalog can be found at http://walking.about.com/od/tours/a/walkingvacation_3.htm

Lengthier walks may require some advance planning and toting some supplies. Don't forget the water!

From a health viewpoint, a walking vacation sure beats the heck out of a cruise that packs on 12 pounds of extra weight from the 24-hour a day buffet. If you're in the midst of a weight loss effort, several hours of walking through interesting locales and scenery can make it effortless.

There's loads of neat places to visit from a walker's perspective. One interesting website is www.waterfallwalks.com that lists trails that provide spectacular views of waterfalls.

Another variation on this theme is biking vacations. My wife and I are trying to set the time aside for a biking tour of wineries in the French countryside. That's our kind of multi-tasking!

"Expanded indications for implantable defibrillators"

So reads the headline on a magazine I received recently (along with thousands of my colleagues) from a major hospital system.

It goes on to say: "In January 2005, indications for implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) were substantially broadened [emphasis ours] to include most patients with a left ventricular ejection fraction (EF) of 35% or less. This change translates into a 2- to 3-fold increase in the number of Medicare beneficiariries eligible for ICDs."

Ka-ching!!! Hear the money piling up in the bank?

The device manufacturers are constantly churning data and lobbying for reimbursement to expand the use of their devices to more and more people. Defibrillators in particularly are generally a $25,000 to $50,000 opportunity for the device manufacturer alone, not counting the costs incurred at the hospital for implantation.

Beware. As reimbursement for stents and other procedures diminishes, expect a sudden "demand" for more and more people to get implantable defibrillators. Better yet, stay away from the whole issue by preventing your heart attack.

Get a heart scan--but then don't delay taking action!

I just came from one of the local hospitals after having performed a heart catheterization on a patient I met earlier this week.

Jack had gotten a heart scan a year ago with a score of 246, placing him in the 76th percentile. The "event" rate with this percentile rank is around 3% per year--not very high but enough to pose risk over a long period.

Jack chose to ignore his score. After all, the pressures of work at the University, maintaining his home and yard, etc. consumed all his energies. He came to my office--now one year after his scan--and told me about the chest pressure he was getting. Initially, his chest pains occurred with extended walking. In the past week, however, Jack was experiencing chest pressure with just walking 30 feet.

This pattern of increasing symptoms is called "accelerated angina", meaning that Jack was rapidly heading towards a heart attack. So I advised a heart catheterization in near future.

Jack's catheterization showed extensive plaque including a 50% blockage in the mainstem artery and 90% in the artery to the front of the heart (left anterior descending artery). Jack is going to have a bypass operation tomorrow.

What if Jack hadn't ignored his heart scan from a year ago? Well, I'd be very confident in saying that he would not be undergoing bypass surgery tomorrow.

The lesson: Don't dilly-dally on taking action to keep your plaque from growing. While it's not an emergency, it can easily become one if you choose to ignore your scan.

Feel that nudge in your back?

You feel that nudge in your back? That's your local hospitals competing for your bypass surgery business.

Just this morning while watching a morning news show, I saw three advertisements for hospital bypass surgery programs. One ad featured a man in his 50s telling his story:"The cardiologist determined immediately that I needed a triple bypass operation. My family and I are very grateful to _____ hospital!"

In what other field is failure celebrated so prominently? When I see these ads, I hear "My doctors failed to provide early detection and then prevent what became a life-threatening condition, even though heart disease is a chronic process that requires decades to develop." What if our man said instead,"I had a heart scan and my score was high. So I was shown why I had so much plaque. They then showed me how to control and even reduce the amount of plaque I had. I'm living safely and symptom-free without need for surgery or procedures."

Of course, the hospital is out $60,000-100,000 for the surgery. How else could they afford ad campaigns costing several million dollars a year? See these advertisements for what they are: Marketing generated by profit-seeking businesses competing for your dollars--lots of them.
Creatine: Not just for muscle heads

Creatine: Not just for muscle heads

Even if you’re not interested in building big muscles like a bodybuilder, there are health benefits to increasing muscle mass: increased bone density, better balance, and fewer injuries. Greater muscle mass means higher metabolic rate, improved insulin responsiveness, lower blood sugar. The inevitable loss of muscle mass of aging can lead to frailty, an increasingly common situation for the elderly. Muscle loss be reversed, health improved as a result.

Since its introduction in 1994, creatine has exploded in popularity, particularly among bodybuilders and athletes interested in gaining muscle mass and strength. But creatine is not just for young weight lifters. If you are just interested in increasing muscle mass for its health benefits, then creatine is something to consider.

A study of creatine supplementation in men, average age 70 years, demonstrated that, when creatine was combined with strength training, it increased muscle mass 250% better than placebo (7.26 lb muscle vs 2.86 lb muscle), along with improved leg strength and endurance. The same group also demonstrated 3.2% increased bone density (measured using dual energy X-ray absorptiometry) after 12 weeks in participants taking creatine with strength training, while the control (no strength training, no creatine) group decreased by 1.0%.

Benefits are not confined to men. Similar results were observed in another study that included women (age 65 and older), with outcomes in females comparable to males. This is especially important for females, given the common development of osteopenia and osteoporosis in postmenopausal females.

Other studies have shown that benefits are maintained after stopping creatine supplementation.

The most popular form of creatine is the monohydrate, generally taken as a “loading” phase of 15-20 grams per day (generally split into 3-4 doses of 5 grams) for 5-7 days, followed by weeks to months of 2-5 grams per day.

An alternative form, polyethylene glycosylated creatine (PEG-creatine) provides similar effects at one-fourth to one-half the dose of creatine, i.e., 1.25-2.5 grams per day.

Despite previous concerns about kidney toxicity with prolonged use, another study showed that athletes taking creatine for up to 21 months have shown no adverse effects on kidney function, lipid (cholesterol) values, or other basic health measures.

Having healthy muscle mass doesn't make you bulge like a bodybuilder. With modest efforts at strength training, augmented with creatine supplementation, you have a wonderful tool to feel better, reduce injury, increase bone density, and combat abnormal insulin resistance, not to mention accelerate weight loss, since lean muscle mass consumes energy.

Comments (29) -

  • Chris

    7/5/2009 7:57:53 PM |

    I go thorugh phases of taking creatine every now and again and it does make me feel stronger and look better....but it also makes me get cramps and urinate a lot and I am not sure if that is healthy?

  • Lena

    7/5/2009 10:00:12 PM |

    There is also good evidence that for people who have kidney disease and are on a low-protein diet, supplementing with carnitine, amino acids and keto acids significantly improves health and slows kidney function decline. Some nephrologists had been recommending against a low-protein diet for kidney patients as on its own it decreases health basically due to wasting, but with the supplements this risk is removed and overall health improves.

    There is an American doctor working in Malaysia with people who can barely afford dialysis who is a big advocate of this approach, since the supplements are cheap and can delay the start of dialysis by years.

    http://jasn.asnjournals.org/cgi/reprint/2/7/1178.pdf

    http://www.pkdiet.com/pdf/SavingFailingKidneys.pdf

  • Lynn M.

    7/5/2009 10:32:19 PM |

    Too bad there wasn't a control group of strength training but no creatine to separate out the effects of strength training vs. creatine.

  • Anonymous

    7/5/2009 10:58:21 PM |

    My husband gained massively in strength and size by taking creatine and weightlifting so I'm convinced that it works. However, he says that it takes a lot glucose to activate it and since I was low carbing with the hopes that it might improve my Crohn's,  I wanted to avoid drinking all the juice, a pint or more, that he disolves the creatine in when he takes it.

    Karen

  • Fitness-Diet-Info!

    7/5/2009 11:15:36 PM |

    Nice looking blog. Great article on Creatine. www.Fitness-Diet-Info.blogspot.com

  • kris

    7/6/2009 1:46:49 AM |

    I wonder if any positive/negative effects for hypo/hyper thyroid?

  • Anonymous

    7/6/2009 2:43:57 AM |

    Dr. D,

    I think you made a typo in paragraph 6. I believe you meant to say grams (not milligrams).

    Also, I think you left out the word, "can" in the last sentence of your first paragraph.

    Keep up the good work!

    JohnM

    P.S. I hope someday you will share a story if any of your patients have ever reversed their scan all the way down to zero. I know you have mentioned big reductions, but I am assuming those are people with pretty big scores to begin with. I was always curious if any of them ever made it all the way back down to zero..

  • dr j

    7/6/2009 12:17:03 PM |

    I maybe am wrong....
    read this loading as
    0.3-g Cr.kg(-1) body weight per day for the first week
    for a 70 kg male, 70x0.3=21 g per day
    could someone correct me pls?

  • Anonymous

    7/6/2009 3:35:47 PM |

    Dr Davis:
    Thought that Creatine needed to be taken with carbs/sugar.  what is the corect way to take it

  • Joe E O

    7/6/2009 3:36:04 PM |

    Dr Davis,
    I can't agree more. Not taking creatine while strength training (especially for folks over the age of 40 who may be taking a statin ) is like going out in the the rain without an umbrella.

    Personally - I would put strength training while using creatine right up there with the normalization of Vitamin D as far as improving my quality of life.

    Peace

    Joe E O

  • Anonymous

    7/6/2009 3:48:23 PM |

    Typos: In the monohydrate paragraph, you say mg where you mean grams.

  • karl

    7/6/2009 3:52:40 PM |

    Yes - I think your units are off -- should be g - not mg.

  • Dr. William Davis

    7/6/2009 4:15:07 PM |

    Thanks for catching the typos.

    Yes: Creatine doses should be in grams, not milligrams.

  • pmpctek

    7/6/2009 6:45:52 PM |

    To those asking if creatine must be taken with carbs, in one word, no.

    Yes, creatine taken w/simple carbs has proven to cause faster and more complete absorption. But, when we're talking 15-20 grams/d during the loading phase, we're going to maximize our body's stores within an extra day or two anyway, without having to spike our insulin.

    My only concern with creatine is that it causes initial weight gain to be almost entirely due to increased water volume within the muscles and blood vessels.  That may be concerning for people trying to lower their blood pressure. The studies I've read have proven it does not increase bp.  But I have also read anecdotal reports that it may have caused acute elevated bp in some people after starting creatine.

  • Dr. William Davis

    7/6/2009 10:39:26 PM |

    By the way, I've also written a full-length article for Life Extension Magazine called Superhuman that will detail creatine use, along with HMB, BCAA, and other performance-enhancing supplements for non-bodybuilders.

  • darnoconrad

    7/7/2009 5:29:46 AM |

    Dr. William Davis,

    Does the increased production of creatinine cause concern?

    There was a product created to subvert the production of Creatinine called Kre-Alkalyn which fused ash with creatine-monohydrate in order to produce a pH balanced Creatine product which would not breakdown into Creatinine in the body. The pH of Kre-Alkalyn is at around 14. According to the company that holds the patent, as little as only 1-3g is needed in place of the 15-20g of creatine-monohydrate. According to studies posted on their own site, the Kre-Alkalyn users out perform the creatine-monohydrate users.

    I would like you to comment critically or share any information that you have on these subjects please.

    Thank You!

  • Zach

    7/8/2009 2:03:06 AM |

    Dr. Mike,
    I had kidney stones last year.  I am on the paleo diet/EF diet.  Once a week or so, in addition to supplements of a multivitamin, antioxidants, and vitamin D I take some ginger extract, which really makes my whole kidney area feel cleaned out.  I'm going to have to try out the creatine.
    Best Regards,
    Zach

  • Andrew

    7/8/2009 7:39:14 AM |

    Two comments as an avid creatine user:

    It's not necessary to load creatine.  All the loading phase does is saturate your body more quickly.  However, many people, myself included find the loading phase not only annoying, but also causes a significant amount of bloat.  IMO, you can just take it in 5g doses to start and kind of ease into it.  There's no real reason not to do it this way, as loading is just faster, not better.

    There are a few forms of creatine.  I prefer supplements made with Creapure, as it seems to go down more smoothly.  I also use powder for quicker absorption, instead of pills.  I generally just put the creatine dose in my mouth and then chug some water.  Creatine doesn't have any taste, so it's really just a matter of texture if you can stand it.  The primary thing I aim for is about 1 gal of water per day.  This isn't as daunting as it sounds, as you should be drinking close to that amount, anyway.

    Dr. Davis - If possible, could you do a post about Beta Alanine?

  • Anonymous

    7/15/2009 5:39:18 PM |

    Supplementation with creatine greatly increases ones chances for developing rhabdomyolysis. Beware, especially if you are taking it in combination with a statin.

  • Anonymous

    7/16/2009 2:03:57 AM |

    quitting the statin for a few months is a good idea anyhow.  I am lucky to have the support of an enlightened PCPhys.  She provides guidance and support when I ask to make changes to my Statin or add a supplement.  I don't need her permission to stop taking it but in consultation, she will ask what my goal for the change is and tell me what to look out for.  Get y'rself one of these consultative Docs, they are true gems.

  • william Trumbower

    8/25/2009 9:01:40 PM |

    After reading your post I added creatine along with D-Ribose twice a day.  I do an Ultrafit work out twice weekly and was astonished at the increase in my strength.  I had no side effects at all.  I eat lowcarb-gluten free.

  • Anonymous

    12/5/2009 6:19:03 PM |

    Hey are you a professional journalist? This article is very well written, as compared to most other blogs i saw today….
    anyhow thanks for the good read!

  • Jolly

    2/16/2010 1:16:21 AM |

    Any idea when your Superhuman article will be published?

  • Anonymous

    4/1/2010 1:56:55 AM |

    The doc should compare kre-alkalyn to all studies compaired to creatine are very promising.

  • Anonymous

    7/22/2010 7:21:34 AM |

    Im 16 yrs old and i have osteoperosis. i go to a world class doctor who specializes in kidneys. i took a bone density test and 24hr urine test. i took creatine for weightlifting trying to get bigger. when he told me the results he said everything was normal except one thing. i was excreting too much calcium and not retaining too much citrate. (or something). this leads to kidney stones and other problems. creatine is horrible for you. it lowers bone density long term and puts stress on your kidneys. same with shakes. if you have a good diet thats enough protein already. when you take more protein it sits in your stomach waiting to be processed and is terrible for your kidneys. all this info is from my doctor.....just a heads up. i thought it was safe. but i was wrong.

  • Scott

    9/13/2010 6:28:50 PM |

    Good post.

    http://www.threeblendcreatine.co.uk

  • buy jeans

    11/3/2010 9:15:01 PM |

    Benefits are not confined to men. Similar results were observed in another study that included women (age 65 and older), with outcomes in females comparable to males. This is especially important for females, given the common development of osteopenia and osteoporosis in postmenopausal females.

  • David

    12/23/2010 6:38:46 PM |

    ATP is a long name for a phosphate that increases muscle contraction. Creatine in NO way is harmful, as you can find Creatine in red meats like the steak you eat after your workout. If taken properly (5mg a day), you will notice increases in size, power, as well as weight.

  • Harry

    12/28/2010 12:05:53 PM |

    I took a supplement containing creatine one evening and the next morning I woke up with chest pounding arrythmia. I went to the ER, was diagnosed with Atrial Fibrillation with rapid ventricular response and Rhabdomyolysis (creatine kinase 17000 u/L with a normal range 40-170 u/L) and got admitted to the hospital. The A-Fib lasted 24 hours and the rhabdomyolysis lasted 7 days. I had not associated the creatine with this episode, until a few months later I came across an article titled "Lone atrial fibrillation associated with creatine monohydrate supplementation"
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15899738
    So, before you supplement with creatinine, keep in mind the danger of atrial fibrillation.

Loading
The ultimate “bioidentical” hormone

The ultimate “bioidentical” hormone

There has been a lot of debate over whether or not “bio-identical” hormones, i.e., hormones identical to the human form, are superior to non-human forms dispensed by the drug industry.

The FDA is currently taking steps to clamp down on availability of bioidentical hormones and their claims of superiority, despite a groundswell of grassroot support for them. The argument has pitted anti-aging practitioners and the public, as well as the likes of Oprah and Suzanne Somers, against Big Pharma and the FDA, the two forces trying to squash the bioidentical hormone movement.

Regardless of what heavy-handed approach the FDA takes, we already have access to hormones identical to the original human form. It requires no prescription and yields downstream hormones that the human body recognizes as human.

That "bioidentical" hormone is pregnenolone.

Pregnenolone is the first biochemical step in the conversion of dietary cholesterol (yes-cholesterol!) to numerous other hormones. Pregnenolone is the source of the hormones that lie at the center of the bioidentical hormone controversy: estrogens, progesterone, and testosterone. We therefore already have our own over-the-counter, non-prescription form of bioidentical hormones.

Supplemental pregnenolone increases estrogens (mildly), progesterone, and testosterone. Prenenonlone supplementation simply provide more of the basic substrate for hormone production. The increase in hormones is usually modest, not as vigorous as direct hormone replacement like, say, testosterone or progesterone topical creams. But pregnenolone can be useful when small to moderate increases are desired, such as for reduction of Lp(a). A theoretical downside is that pregnenonlone can also convert to cortisol, the adrenal gland hormone that regulates fluid and blood pressure. However, I've not seen any measurable increase in cortisol with low doses of pregnenonlone and limited data suggest that it does not. Pregnenolone also converts to the other adrenal gland hormone, DHEA; I call DHEA "the hormone of assertiveness," since some people who take too much pregnenolone (or direct DHEA) acquire excessive assertiveness.

The key to pregnenolone supplementation is to proceed gradually and begin with a small dose, e.g., 5 mg every morning. Hormonal assessment is best conducted periodically to assess the effects and to determine whether a dose adjustment is in order.

Comments (19) -

  • Jenny

    7/2/2009 12:46:09 PM |

    Dr. Davis,

    I have tried  "bioidentical" female hormones from a compounding pharmacy and ended up with sky high blood pressure and blood sugar. I do very well on the pharmaceutical yam-based estrogen. So I would caution people not to assume these hormones are benign.

    I also have supplemented pregnenolone for a while and had to stop as I also started to see bad results with blood pressure and a hint of masculinizing.

    So I would warn older women to be very careful with these hormones. The doses seem to be set very high and some of them may be optimized for males.

  • Nancy LC

    7/2/2009 4:36:31 PM |

    Dr. Davis, do you recommend any particular brand of pregnenelone?

  • billye

    7/2/2009 9:06:47 PM |

    Dr. Davis,

    Ordinarily I would have no interest in the ultimate " bioidentical" hormone" but, my daughter is going through her changes and is having a bad time with them.  Could pregnenelone be used to alleviate problematic symptoms? She is dead set against hormone therapy because she has a fear of  cancer.

  • Anonymous

    7/3/2009 3:04:08 AM |

    Bioidentical hormones have been a godsend for me... after "toughing out" a particularly long and difficult perimenopause I was in pretty dire straits.  I found a doctor who uses both mainstream Big Pharma hormones and bioidenticals in his ob/gyn practice, depending on the patient and their needs.  He is board certified, highly skilled, and compassionate.  After some trial and error and numerous blood tests, we arrived at compounded estrogen and progesterone as the best for me.  Gone are many horrible symptoms, so of course I would be very upset if the FDA were to "crack down" on "bioidenticals" in favor of manufactured Big Pharma products.

    That being said, if the FDA is so inclined... I will roll with it.  There are several prescription estrogen products, both oral and topical that could meet my needs.  They are for the most part manufactured from soy (as are most bioidenticals).  There are also some progesterone products manufactured by Big Pharma companies... and I am betting we can figure out how to get to the combination and dosage I require to feel good and normal.

    What won't I take?   Well Premarin and Prem-Pro for starters.  They're not bioidentical... in fact they are foreign to the human body.  Equilin,  derived from pregnant mares urine, or manufactured from soy, is not a requisite of the human body and IMO doesn't belong there. Give women a foreign hormone substance for years and wonder why the alarming results?  Hummm...

    As for pregnenolone, I don't think so, at least not for me.  At this late date, I doubt that my body would be efficient in utilizing it, or sending it down the correct pathway.  Why not just use the real things?

    madcook

  • Anonymous

    7/3/2009 3:42:55 AM |

    DHEA can cause substantial hair loss in men, it did suddenly and acutely in me.

  • pmpctek

    7/3/2009 4:42:09 AM |

    I'm no expert but it's my understanding that pregnenolone is the raw material for the production of DHEA, which is the raw material for the production of testosterone, estrogen, and progesterone.

    It's also my understanding that it's always best to try and supplement "bioidentical" hormones that are closest to the natural target hormone.

    If that's true and if pregnenolone is low and DHEA normal (say through supplementation) what's the point of taking pregnenolone at all?

  • Anonymous

    7/3/2009 2:15:38 PM |

    I've been on bioidentical hormones (progesterone) for 18 months and have had incredible success. I'm under the care of a MD who specializes in bioidentical hormones. Bioidenticals are safe and effective if the supplementation is medically supervised.

  • Anna

    7/3/2009 5:27:29 PM |

    At 47 yo, still cycling regularly but definitely perimenopausal the past few years.  New cycles start every 14-20 days (normal in every other way) if I don't use progesterone, but with progesterone, cycles are closer to normal length, every 21-28 days.  

    I've been using bioidentical OTC progesterone cream for a little over two years with very good results and no side effects that I can detect.  Just this week I switched to a higher prog dose via compounded Rx, as symptoms were returning/increasing the past couple months (especially midcycle extreme breast tenderness and increased lumpiness- negative ultrasound and mammograms though thermogram was suspicious, plus last exam indicated return of uterine fibroid - all suggestive of high estrogen/low progesterone imbalance).  

    A recent luteal phase test of estradiol showed it to be twice as high (549 pg/ml) as the upper end of the ref range, which explains the dramatically increased symptoms.  Guess those ovaries are screaming in protest during their decommissioning!  Progesterone levels were in the tank.  So was 8am cortisol level.  

    BTW, I've always avoided any supplemental phytoestrogens such as soy, "menopause" herbs, etc.  Numerous lood tests over the past 15 years have indicated no lack of estradiol (esp in recent years), but in fact, chronically low progesterone, despite regular cycles.  

    Along with years of undiagnosed hypothyroidism, I think low progesterone and a slightly shortened luteal phase were likely reasons why I had trouble conceiving 8-15 years ago (despite two infertility work-ups and "expert" review of my tests).  Wish I knew then what I know now (don't we all?)

    This backlash against biodidentical hormones, orchestrated by Wyett and other Big Pharma patent holders is very disturbing.  Like any other drug, the skill, experience, and knowledge of the doctor is crucial in prescribing them for the best effective treatment.  

    I've been cautious about self-treating with OTC hormones without some experienced guidance, including pregnenolone, because I wasn't sure it wouldn't convert to more estradiol instead of the progesterone and testosterone I needed.  But it took a long time to find an MD which the right experience.  Of course, she's not in my HMO-subscribed system so I have to pay out of pocket for office visits or compounded Rx, but it's worth it.  She writes the lab orders on a Rx form, which I take to the HMO lab, so insurance covers any of the lab tests they do.  Results are faxed to the ordering MD, even though she isn't in the system.

  • Jim, Guacamole Diet

    7/5/2009 3:41:40 AM |

    I guess I'm just an ignorant old Luddite, but I'm skeptical of all substances that don't come in natural foods. No prescription or OTC stuff for me if I can avoid it.

  • homertobias

    7/9/2009 3:39:50 PM |

    Anna,

    Late 40's are a rough time of life, kind of like being a 13 year old girl in reverse.  Ovaries are cranky as they rev up and as they rev down.  Next they start behaving like loose lightbulbs. They turn off for a month or three then they turn right back on.  It is hard to relie on hormone levels in that phase because things just keep changing.
    Late 40's usually screams progesterone deficiency.  First up to treat is usually vitex 500mg whole fruit daily.  Takes 3 months for full effect. Dirt cheap.  It works as a prolactin inhibiter and a progesterone booster.  Second is progest cream.  Third compounded progesterone or prometrium.  Route of prometrium varies with symptomatology.  Can't sleep?  Progesterone needs to be oral.  Still can't sleep?  Take it with food at bedtime to enhance absorbtion or up the dose.  Hung over in the morning?  Take it earlier.  Sleep not an issue but can't stand those early periods?  Use the progesterone vaginally at night.  Just shove it in as high as it will go.  The gelatin capsule dissolves and it goes straight to the uterus.

  • Elizabeth

    7/14/2009 9:58:46 PM |

    From my experience, bioidentical hormones really do work! After hearing so many people, like Susanne Somers and Oprah, talk about the
    benefits of hormone replacement
    therapy, I decided to give it a try. I looked around a lot, and I
    finally chose VieNue
    Bioidentical Testosterone Cream. All I have to say is, IT WORKS! My mood
    is so much better. I feel healthier. I have a healthy love life again - I
    used to always feel so "not into it." Now my husband and I are connecting
    again like we did years ago. Definitely give VieNue Bioidentical Testosterone
    Cream a try, you won't regret it. Here's the link vienue bioidentical testosterone cream

  • Anonymous

    7/26/2009 7:09:24 PM |

    You need to do a lot of reserach before starting hormone therapy... You should always have your hormones tested first! Saliva test is the best way to test your hormones levels. Also you need to use a compounding pharmacy that you can trust and a good doctor. This website helped to show why to choice bioidentcal hormones and you can even find a doctor in your area: http://www.bodylogicmd.com/research/safety-of-bioidentical-hormones

  • Amir

    8/21/2009 1:27:30 AM |

    I have been researching the bioidentical hormone therapy topic for a while and would like to see what people's opinions on the health benefits of bioidentical hormones like the reduction of breast cancer as explained in this article,

    http://bodylogicmd.com/hormone-articles/review-of-hormones-and-breast-cancer-can-we-use-them-in-ways-that-could-reduce-the-risk

  • Gloria Ives

    8/24/2009 4:01:45 AM |

    Can you address the cardiovascular risks associated with bioidentical supplementation as compared to typical pharmaceutical hrt?

  • Bioidentical Hormones UK

    9/24/2009 7:21:21 PM |

    Bioidentical hormones are products that are chemically identical to what's made in a woman's body.
    Some are approved as medications; others are supplements. Learn more about it from professionals in the field.

  • Anonymous

    9/25/2009 2:36:53 AM |

    Why not simply increase dietary cholesterol?

  • Lance Chambers

    3/1/2010 1:51:02 AM |

    I have watched the video and it's sad that corporate pharmaceutical industries have to chemically alter a natural substance in order to get patent for synthetic medicine or synthetic hormones but I think synthetic hormone should not have been approved for human use in the first place. It must have helped many people but in the long run it did more harm than good.

  • Lance Chambers

    3/1/2010 2:02:38 AM |

    Bioidentical hormones refer to hormones that are identical to the chemical structure of the hormones produced by a woman’s body therefore it is better and safer than synthetic hormones. Understanding your symptoms will also help you prepare for it and modification of lifestyle issues like healthy diet of organic foods to resist minor signs, light exercise to improve blood circulation level can help regulate the symptoms of hormone imbalance. Compounded bio-identical hormones are pills, creams, gels, suppositories, injectables, sublingual drops or lozenges that are prescribed by health care providers who tailor the dose to a woman’s individual symptoms and concerns.

  • buy jeans

    11/2/2010 8:16:26 PM |

    Pregnenolone is the first biochemical step in the conversion of dietary cholesterol (yes-cholesterol!) to numerous other hormones. Pregnenolone is the source of the hormones that lie at the center of the bioidentical hormone controversy: estrogens, progesterone, and testosterone. We therefore already have our own over-the-counter, non-prescription form of bioidentical hormones.

Loading